...Mormon church leaders apologized to the family of Holocaust survivor and Jewish rights advocate Simon Wiesenthal after his parents were posthumously baptized, a controversial ritual that Mormons believe allows deceased people a way to the afterlife but offends members of many other religions.

Wiesenthal died in 2005 after surviving the Nazi death camps and spending his life documenting Holocaust crimes and hunting down perpetrators who remained at large. Jews are particularly offended by an attempt to alter the religion of Holocaust victims, who were murdered because of their religion, and the baptism of Holocaust survivors was supposed to have been barred by a 1995 agreement.

Yet records indicate Wiesenthals parents, Asher and Rosa Rapp Wiesenthal, were baptized in proxy ceremonies performed by Mormon church members at temples in Arizona and Utah in late January.

In a statement, the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center denounced the baptismal rites.

We are outraged that such insensitive actions continue in the Mormon temples, said Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean at the center.

The church immediately apologized, saying it was the actions of an individual member of church  whom they did not name  that led to the submission of Wiesenthals name.

We sincerely regret that the actions of an individual member of the church led to the inappropriate submission of these names, Michael Purdy, a spokesman for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said in a statement issued Monday. We consider this a serious breach of our protocol and we have suspended indefinitely this persons ability to access our genealogy records.

SNIP

Other religions, including the Catholic church, have also publicly objected to the baptism of its members, and its been widely reported that Mormon and GOP presidential nominee front-runner Mitt Romneys atheist father-in-law Edward Davies was posthumously baptized.

From the article: Jews are particularly offended by an attempt to alter the religion of Holocaust victims, who were murdered because of their religion, and the baptism of Holocaust survivors was supposed to have been barred by a 1995 agreement.

Mormon leaders agree one thing to the face of others, then their grassroots consistently practice another thing in their secret temple rituals.

From the article: Other religions, including the Catholic church, have also publicly objected to the baptism of its members, and its been widely reported that Mormon and GOP presidential nominee front-runner Mitt Romneys atheist father-in-law Edward Davies was posthumously baptized.

From the article: ...Mormon church leaders apologized to the family of Holocaust survivor and Jewish rights advocate Simon Wiesenthal after his parents were posthumously baptized, a controversial ritual that Mormons believe allows deceased people a way to the afterlife but offends members of many other religions.

Well, this all gives lie to this Mormon belief. If the Mormons truly thought that baptizing Jews by proxy was the ONLY way to "save" them, then they'd continue to do it hell or high water. Yet they cave on doing "the work of the Mormon lord." Why? Because it's "controversial" and "offensive." Wow! If that was the watershed criteria for whether to continue something, where would Christianity be?

They don’t need this matter to become a “distraction” from their coordinated efforts to shove Romney down our throats. That’s the only reason they promptly apologized. Can’t afford to let their cultush practice get legs in the media.

Well, this all gives lie to this Mormon belief. If the Mormons truly thought that baptizing Jews by proxy was the ONLY way to "save" them, then they'd continue to do it hell or high water.

This is exactly right. If it is the only way to give others a patah to salvation, they should continue it, regardless of who is offended. Besides, there is no right not to be offended in the Constitution, or in nature.

The Mormons should NEVER apologize for this. On separate issue, if they DO apologize and promise to quit, then they should, and cease baptizing, unless they publicly state that they will do so.

Finally, what is it with the Jews? They still (and by "they" I mean "an awful lot of them", not "all of them". There are several posters on this site that get their panties in a wad if one makes a generalization, no matter how valid) have a victim mentality.

I'm a Christian of the Baptist flavor. I will remain so. The Mormons are welcome to baptize me all they want. I see no need to take offense because it doesn't affect me, and at least I realize that they think they have good intentions.

Some people need to get over themselves, and I don't mean just Jewish people, either. The world owes you nothing. Not money, not food, not medical care, not respect, and not "sensitivity". You have to go out and earn them.

4
posted on 02/15/2012 6:18:45 AM PST
by chesley
(Eat what you want, and die like a man. Never trust anyone who hasn't been punched in the face)

“If the Mormons truly thought that baptizing Jews by proxy was the ONLY way to “save” them, then they’d continue to do it hell or high water. Yet they cave on doing “the work of the Mormon lord.” Why? Because it’s “controversial” and “offensive.” Wow! If that was the watershed criteria for whether to continue something, where would Christianity be?”

I think that is a very good point. “Sorry about your ancestors who happen to be Jewish, but they don’t get baptism because some living people frown upon us doing that.” Same thing with giving in to the state on polygamy. “Hey thanks for the theological advice on our marriage practices, O wise gubberment, really opened our eyes on that one.”

I’m one of those who believes the Mormon faith is loony, but I’m not sure I understand the offense taken when they do stuff like this. Several religions think I’m going to rot in hell, and that sentiment doesn’t offend me. If a religion posthumously conducts some ceremony on my behalf thinking they are doing me a favor, they can knock themselves out.

I’m no fan of the Mormon’s but I’m not entirely sure what the fuss is all about. Trying to “baptize” people of other faiths into your faith after their deaths certainly is tacky (and also incredibly pointless). But so what? I could care less is some Mormon baptized my late father, who was a devout Baptist. (I know he’s enjoying his heavenly reward and if anything, would probably get a chuckle out of it himself.) Does the fact that the Mormons baptized Mr. and Mrs. Wiesenthal make them any less Jewish or will effect what happens to them in the great beyond? I Seriously doubt it...

Agreed. Call me sentimental and silly, but I actually think it’s a nice-hearted gesture for the LDS to try to “baptize” me after I die. I don’t think it has any effect, of course, but it’s kind of them to make the gesture. And whom is it harming, anyway? If someone says “May Krishna bless you”, I don’t get myself into a knot; I appreciate the thought behind it, even if I think it’s mistaken. Same token, here.

9
posted on 02/15/2012 6:52:51 AM PST
by paladinan
(Rule #1: There is a God. Rule #2: It isn't you.)

I don't know what is more ridiculous...baptizing for the dead...or complaining about it.

It's not like the mormons took your living relative and baptized them. Your relative is DEAD and if you are a person of faith...then you have faith that your relative has already been judged. If they are in HELL...then the worst case scenario is they get moved to heaven (which I do not belive happens). If they are in heaven...then what harm is there?

Of all the things to take offense over...they choose THIS? Hasn't BHO stepped on enough toes? Shouldn't you be focused a little more on THAT? Good grief.

I AM Jewish, I I would absolutely HATE to learn that my parents or my grand-parents names could be found on a mormon nutty database and baptized by a bunch of crazy sectarians.

I dont love my kin LESS, because they passed away. Their memory is dear to me; so Im telling the mormons : leave us alone, idiots, as we leave you alone!

In their favor, they do have wonderful, and free, resources for tracing ancestors.

Does being added to some data base really reflect on the deceased? - after all, it's an action they never agreed to, but a possible benefit to future family genealogists.

I'm not a mornom, but have used their resources for tracing families. Their 60’s missions to Scotland managed to microfilm all of the church historical records. They make the results available for free, the Scottish govt. charges you “per look”.

Im one of those who believes the Mormon faith is loony, but Im not sure I understand the offense taken when they do stuff like this. Several religions think Im going to rot in hell, and that sentiment doesnt offend me. If a religion posthumously conducts some ceremony on my behalf thinking they are doing me a favor, they can knock themselves out.

Let's look at just a few problematic offensive points from the point of the New Testament.

I'll cover the second in another post.

Since countless LDS leaders have called the Mormon people self-saviors and saviors of the dead, it's not only a distraction from the poor but delusional.

We already have a "Savior of the world" -- we don't need millions more trying to bump Jesus out of that limelight: * And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be THE Savior of the world. (1 John 4:14) * They said to the woman, "We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is THE Savior of the world." (John 4:42)

I don't know what is more ridiculous...baptizing for the dead...or complaining about it. [Nelson111, post #11]

In their favor, they do have wonderful, and free, resources for tracing ancestors. Does being added to some data base really reflect on the deceased? [Az_gila]

Az_gila -- Lds do more than "genealogize" -- they ritualize...the dead in their temples.

But let's look @ genealogy for a moment -- as to what can become objectionable about it from a Biblical standpoint.

Millions of Mormon man-hours -- Genealogy -- is rooted in baptizing dead people. Now, genealogy for "roots-searching" is fine, but when "genealogy as ultra time consuming religious obsession" takes over, wouldn't you say it might be good to consider what the apostle Paul has to say about this?

Or do you all just ignore the New Testament?

...stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer nor to devote themselves to myths AND ENDLESS GENEALOGIES. THESE PROMOTE CONTROVERSIES RATHER THAN GOD'S WORKwhich is by faith." (1 Timothy 1:3-4)

But AVOID FOOLISH CONTROVERSIES AND GENEALOGIES...because these are unprofitable and useless. (Titus 3:9)

(Paul says it's useless, provokes controversy, and is not faith-promoting. So even the controversy ignited by protagonist Mormons is distracting)

As for the question, "Does this 'hurt' anyone?" yes it does -- in two prominent ways...one of which I covered last post.

THE OTHER WAY IT HARMS?

It hurts the living because over-focusing on the dead distracts what we can do in relating to & in caring for the living!.

We can all agree that Jesus talked much about serving the living -- the poor, the widow, the orphan, the lost sheep, right?

So what would happen in the world if all religions obsessed with the dead as much as Mormons do? Obviously, we're not going to "end poverty in our lifetime" (Jesus said, "the poor will always be with you")...but since countless LDS leaders have called the Mormon people self-saviors and saviors of the dead, it's not only a distraction from the poor but delusional.

I respectfully disagree with your sentiments. On a planet of 6 billion people, I cannot be bothered to ensure I object to whatever practices are being carried out by believers of other faiths. Is my failure to call out some tribal ritual in central Africa jeopardizing my salvation? I would rather focus my attentions on calling out the true enemies of God, who are themselves focused on killing me and my brethren. Those who are focused on ensuring my salvation get a better shake.

Just be wary of the information, in many cases it is not accurate. My mother is entered three times, with the information being incorrect in some fashion. I have offered to send copies of birth and death certificates and the response is “we stand by the entries”.
Even Jesus is listed with His wives and cause of death as unknown.

19
posted on 02/15/2012 8:34:11 AM PST
by svcw
(Only difference between Romney & BH is one thinks he will be god & other one thinks he already is.)

I respectfully disagree with your sentiments. On a planet of 6 billion people, I cannot be bothered to ensure I object to whatever practices are being carried out by believers of other faiths.

Well, IF you are a Christian -- and you don't or won't object to what other groups that also label themselves as "Christian" ... then, hey, please show some consistency there...

If you're real name, for example, is John Doe Bird...and somebody regularly goes online pretending to be John Doe Bird and slanders do and misrepresents you and makes you look like a fool, then hey, I guess you can't be "bothered" to clarify that on your behalf.

We can just let them represent you as you.

Mr. Bird, ya better believe that when counterfeit high denominational bills "represent" themselves as the real deal, than vested interests who have a role in protecting the authentic from the counterfeit take all kinds of time-consuming & $-consuming ways to protect those interests!

What? You're advice to them is, "On a planet of 6 billion people, you cannot be bothered to ensure I object to whatever counterfeit practices are being carried out by counterfeiters"????

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.